From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Tue Apr 29 17:22:06 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_6); 30 Apr 2003 00:22:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 17910 invoked from network); 30 Apr 2003 00:22:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 30 Apr 2003 00:22:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Apr 2003 00:22:06 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 19AfMM-0003QF-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:22:06 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19AfMD-0003Pe-00; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:21:57 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:21:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lmsmtp01.st1.spray.net ([212.78.202.111]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19AfLZ-0003NL-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:21:18 -0700 Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-68-120.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.68.120]) by lmsmtp01.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 194E21E783 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 02:20:45 +0200 (MEST) To: Subject: [lojban] Re: nai in UI (was: BPFK phpbb) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 01:20:42 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030428212623.0390d4d0@pop.east.cox.net> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-archive-position: 5025 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: "And Rosta" Reply-To: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin Robert LeChevalier: > At 04:36 PM 4/28/03 -0400, Invent Yourself wrote: > >On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, Jorge Llambías wrote: > > > la camgusmis cusku di'e > > > > > > > My new example of how insane this is is > > > > > > > > nai nai nai mi nai nelci nai nai nai > > > > > > > > which would be legal if this change was made > > > > > > nai nai nai na'e bo mi na'e na'e na'e nelci > > > > > > is currently grammatical (and equally bad style) > > > >As is "jai jai jai na'e jai je'a klesi jai cupra", which was offered by a > >random sentence generator, and defended by Jay as being grammatical, and > >yet now we're supposed to get our panties twisted at the fear of "nai nai > >nai" > > That one bit of nonsense passes the parser is no argument to make more > nonsense pass the parser I agree. It's an argument to make both bits of nonsense fail the parser. A parser that passes nonsense is nonsense. --And. From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Tue Apr 29 17:22:06 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_6); 30 Apr 2003 00:22:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 17910 invoked from network); 30 Apr 2003 00:22:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 30 Apr 2003 00:22:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Apr 2003 00:22:06 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 19AfMM-0003QF-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:22:06 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19AfMD-0003Pe-00; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:21:57 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:21:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lmsmtp01.st1.spray.net ([212.78.202.111]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19AfLZ-0003NL-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:21:18 -0700 Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-68-120.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.68.120]) by lmsmtp01.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 194E21E783 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 02:20:45 +0200 (MEST) To: Subject: [lojban] Re: nai in UI (was: BPFK phpbb) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 01:20:42 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030428212623.0390d4d0@pop.east.cox.net> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-archive-position: 5025 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: "And Rosta" Reply-To: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin Robert LeChevalier: > At 04:36 PM 4/28/03 -0400, Invent Yourself wrote: > >On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, Jorge Llambías wrote: > > > la camgusmis cusku di'e > > > > > > > My new example of how insane this is is > > > > > > > > nai nai nai mi nai nelci nai nai nai > > > > > > > > which would be legal if this change was made > > > > > > nai nai nai na'e bo mi na'e na'e na'e nelci > > > > > > is currently grammatical (and equally bad style) > > > >As is "jai jai jai na'e jai je'a klesi jai cupra", which was offered by a > >random sentence generator, and defended by Jay as being grammatical, and > >yet now we're supposed to get our panties twisted at the fear of "nai nai > >nai" > > That one bit of nonsense passes the parser is no argument to make more > nonsense pass the parser I agree. It's an argument to make both bits of nonsense fail the parser. A parser that passes nonsense is nonsense. --And.